Opinion: Guest Opinions

Matthew Kahl: Save Colorado hemp farming with no vote on Amendment X

Amendment X would take the definition of hemp out of the Colorado Constitution, and may take away independent hemp farming. You might only get what the government arranges with lobbyists.

Right now, if I grow cannabis and it's less than 0.3 percent THC, it's hemp. There aren't "approved" cultivars from "approved" providers spending lobbying dollars. Amendment X allows the legislature to define hemp however it wishes, and to force farmers to go through approved channels. A statutory definition means legislators can regulate the little guy out of existence.

If they reduce THC limits to 0.00 percent, it would effectively hand hemp over to agritech giants that have resources to genetically modify cannabis cultivars to 0.00 percent. The average farmer cannot breed a varietal down so far. If that happens, say goodbye to the little guy. Look forward to buying seed every year from agritech giants, to not owning your crop.

The current legislature's assurances mean nothing if their successors are not beholden to promises that are made today. If history is any guide, there will come a time when the Legislature betrays the people, and the only thing preventing that is the state constitution. I'd like to keep it that way. If the Legislature wants 1 percent THC, be transparent, produce an amendment for 1 percent. Vague promises and statutory definitions give us no assurances. We're better off with 0.3 percent. Colorado is leading today. We've already developed the cultivars. They're getting better by the year. If we raise it to 1 percent, we won't be alone. West Virginia defines hemp as less than 1 percent THC. Why can't we? Aren't we the leaders?

Advertisement

Anything else will not convince hemp farmers like me to vote yes on Amendment X. If the legislature wanted to protect Colorado hemp farmers with 1 percent, propose an amendment in defiance of the federal government. We've proved we can influence the feds. Our legalization of hemp is what forced their hand on it in the first place. We want what is best for Colorado, just as West Virginia wants what is best for them. Complete cannabis prohibition wasn't that long ago, and it is only because of states like Colorado bucking the federal system with Amendment 64 that we're even talking about hemp percentages today. We influence the entire nation because we went our own way. Preserve our heritage, give us 1 percent. Leadership is the heritage of the state, and this heritage was implemented by the people, not by the legislators. We are seeing why today.

The fact that some legislators say they want a 1 percent definition, but they also say that there's no support for it, tells me (and many farmers) that there are other forces at work, and this amendment is not to be taken at face value. If we had an amendment for 1 percent, there would be no public debate on this issue. It would pass with a landslide of support, including mine.

I'm not going to trust every future legislature in perpetuity with the definition of hemp. In a few years, these legislators are term-limited and I don't know how future legislators (and future lobbyists) will try to change the definition of hemp. Nobody can convince me they do, either. No one has a crystal ball. It doesn't matter if it comes in two years, in five, in 10, or in 25. If it destroys the Colorado hemp farmer's livelihood and independence from agritech giants, then this is bad for the state, and it is bad for the people of Colorado today.

I'm voting no, and I hope many other voters do, too. I'd like for the legislature to bring back an amendment for 1 percent instead of a statutory definition based on vague promises. If they want something, put it in writing. The people will respond, I guarantee it. We will vote for a 1 percent amendment. No one would object, not one bit.

Legislators and cunning lobbyists are using the desires of the hemp industry for more leeway, and our fear of competition against us, all so they get what they want, and we won't get what we want. We have the strongest guarantees for cannabis cultivation in the country, because it's in our constitution. Don't let them take it out.

Numbers suggest desire is greater than ever to have a CHSAA-sanctioned female divisionClarissa Batrez is a wrestler, not a girl who wrestles. Her father and older brother both wrestled so Batrez was raised in a wrestling environment all her life. Batrez speaks glowingly of the sport and loves that it gives her a competitive avenue through which she can channel her "inner power" and natural aggression. Full Story

The Boulder alt-country band gives its EPs names such as Death and Resurrection, and its songs bear the mark of hard truths and sin. But the punk energy behind the playing, and the sense that it's all in good fun, make it OK to dance to a song like "Death." Full Story